Iona vs Panti

Corkfeen · 10-02-2014 08:24AM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Hmmmmm ......'The speed at which they wrote the cheques was remarkably fast'.....Kinda reminds me of the banking bailout now that you put it that way.

You'd think the guy who had been googling for RTÉ would have asked for the full transcript if he was in doubt. But 12 day settlement instead. :O

AerynSun · 10-02-2014 09:22AM

Jernal wrote: »

...all can be summed up by don't be dick.

Whoops, guilty of most of that. Sorry. Will try for better behaved.

Bannasidhe · 10-02-2014 10:31AM

david75 wrote: »

OT but We were always told Pearse was gay.

Ohhhh That's a whole other screaming match.

Some of Pearse's poetry is a bit...:eek: ...when he waxes lyrically on the theme of young males.

This had led to **** fights...to put it mildly.

Unlike the **** fight about Casement this one hasn't really broken out into the public domain yet.

aloyisious · 10-02-2014 10:56AM

lazygal wrote: »

Yeah it's not like rte broadcasts the Catholic call to prayer twice a day or anything.

But but, don't you get a touch of nostalgia when you hear the peal of bells

Bannasidhe · 10-02-2014 10:59AM

aloyisious wrote: »

But but, don't you get a touch of nostalgia when you hear the peal of bells

I used to use it to set my watch back before the interweb. Turns out the bloody thing isn't even time accurate. :mad:

aloyisious · 10-02-2014 11:04AM

Bongy bongy bongy-time. Now back to equal human rights ;-)

aloyisious · 10-02-2014 11:54AM

From the I/Indo: I guess/hope that these poll results might unsettle Iona, particularly those from South America, ref resurgent belief.

http://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/catholics-tell-pope-we-back-abortion-female-priests-and-birth-control-29994390.html

lazygal · 10-02-2014 12:05PM

aloyisious wrote: »

From the I/Indo: I guess/hope that these poll results might unsettle Iona, particularly those from South America, ref resurgent belief.

http://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/catholics-tell-pope-we-back-abortion-female-priests-and-birth-control-29994390.html

I expect Iona will misrepresent those results as it does all other research.

Cabaal · 10-02-2014 12:06PM

aloyisious wrote: »

From the I/Indo: I guess/hope that these poll results might unsettle Iona, particularly those from South America, ref resurgent belief.

http://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/catholics-tell-pope-we-back-abortion-female-priests-and-birth-control-29994390.html

The breakdown of these numbers for Ireland can be seen here

http://www.irishexaminer.com/archives/2014/0201/ireland/priests-say-church-out-of-touch-on-family-planning-257326.html

Seems the Catholic church is wayyyy out of touch with its followers in Ireland when it comes to basically everything the church is against,

lazygal · 10-02-2014 12:08PM

http://www.irishtimes.com/debate/letters/teaching-more-maths-less-religion-1.1683979

Oh Breda. Caught out again.

Bannasidhe · 10-02-2014 12:08PM

aloyisious wrote: »

From the I/Indo: I guess/hope that these poll results might unsettle Iona, particularly those from South America, ref resurgent belief.

http://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/catholics-tell-pope-we-back-abortion-female-priests-and-birth-control-29994390.html

The thing is the RCC has three options:

1. Change doctrine to bring it into line with public opinion.

This would necessitate jettisoning much of what makes the RCC the RCC. Selling out their core message as it were.

2. Insist that doctrine is doctrine and those who are Roman Catholic adhere to that doctrine or leave (except of course one can't leave)

Do they want to have large numbers of adherents on paper so they can claim 'biggest religion in the World' status or do they want a much smaller but infinitely more faithful membership.

3. Nothing to see here. Move along now.
If I was a betting person....

They may also want to have a wee look see at what can happen when a strict regime tries to introduce some limited liberal concessions to the masses (:P) - Louis XVI and Nicholas II could tell tales about how that can quickly gain pace and before you know it you are being executed by the great unwashed.

aloyisious · 10-02-2014 12:18PM

lazygal wrote: »

I expect Iona will misrepresent those results as it does all other research.

Or, in their words, throw a more revealing light on them to reveal the truth

Cabaal · 10-02-2014 12:18PM

lazygal wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/debate/letters/teaching-more-maths-less-religion-1.1683979

Oh Breda. Caught out again.

she just got burned!

lazygal · 10-02-2014 12:27PM

Cabaal wrote: »

she just got burned!

Psssh you can use "facts" and "large samples" and "peer reviewed data" to prove anything.

goose2005 · 10-02-2014 12:36PM

lazygal wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/debate/letters/teaching-more-maths-less-religion-1.1683979

Oh Breda. Caught out again.

Reality has a liberal bias. And why would we trust anything from Pisa - home of noted liberal secularist Galileo?

lazygal · 10-02-2014 12:38PM

goose2005 wrote: »

Reality has a liberal bias. And why would we trust anything from Pisa - home of noted liberal secularist Galileo?

You're factphobic!!! I'll have ny settlement in cash, cheque or via PayPal please.

swampgas · 10-02-2014 12:39PM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

The thing is the RCC has three options:

1. Change doctrine to bring it into line with public opinion.

This would necessitate jettisoning much of what makes the RCC the RCC. Selling out their core message as it were.

2. Insist that doctrine is doctrine and those who are Roman Catholic adhere to that doctrine or leave (except of course one can't leave)

Do they want to have large numbers of adherents on paper so they can claim 'biggest religion in the World' status or do they want a much smaller but infinitely more faithful membership.

3. Nothing to see here. Move along now.
If I was a betting person....

Or:
4. have the Pope make all sorts of nice sounding noises while not changing anything at all.

That Francis fella can spin some line of plausible sounding waffle:

On one front – divorced worshippers – the Pope has appeared open to change, telling bishops on Friday that priests "are called to ask themselves how to help (divorced couples), so they don't feel excluded from the mercy of God".

Priests, he added, must work out "how to help (divorced and separated couples) not abandon their faith and raise their children in the fullness of the Christian experience".

Lot's of waffle about "helping", not much on changing policy. Not that that's likely, as you point out, any significant change means selling out their official core values, and as we know the RCC is always right, even when it's wrong.

Once again we see just how much Catholics want to change the church into something so different that calling it Catholic would be a joke, rather than simply leave it for something more aligned to their values.

goose2005 · 10-02-2014 12:39PM

vitani wrote: »

I liked the bit about the two brothers buggering each other. Almost as much as the two guys in shiny suits being a satire of civilisation.

As if gay guys would wear shiny suits, I think they'd have more style than that

vitani · 10-02-2014 12:40PM

goose2005 wrote: »

As if gay guys would wear shiny suits, I think they'd have more style than that

Brendan Courtney should sue him for that.

AerynSun · 10-02-2014 12:45PM

swampgas wrote: »

Once again we see just how much Catholics want to change the church into something so different that calling it Catholic would be a joke, rather than simply leave it for something more aligned to their values.

Jebbus, doesn't that sound like the argument about "redefining" marriage? If gays don't like marriage the way it is (between one man and one woman) they should feck off instead of trying to turn it into something so different that calling it marriage would be a joke, rather than simply leave it for something more aligned to their values.

Why the feck should the decent Catholics have to leave the Church rather than try to reform it into being the thing it is supposed to be? (as opposed to the awful thing it has become over time).

But I guess maybe for some people, 'Catholic' is as much a slur as 'gay' is for others?

Doctor DooM · 10-02-2014 12:49PM

AerynSun wrote: »

Why the feck should the decent Catholics have to leave the Church rather than try to reform it into being the thing it is supposed to be? (as opposed to the awful thing it has become over time).

What, exactly, is the RCC supposed to be? Who gets to decide that?

AerynSun · 10-02-2014 12:54PM

Doctor DooM wrote: »

What, exactly, is the RCC supposed to be? Who gets to decide that?

It's supposed to be a collection of people who look out for their neighbour, who are loving and kind and respectful of all people, because the image of G-d is in all people.

That's the bottom line. And it sure has strayed from it. Mostly because the people who 'get to decide' (the hierarchy... instead of everybody!) have been on a long, extended power trip that they still haven't given up yet.

The people in the pews should get to decide what the RCC is supposed to be, that's what 'participation'/communion is theoretically all about.

Bannasidhe · 10-02-2014 01:06PM

AerynSun wrote: »

Jebbus, doesn't that sound like the argument about "redefining" marriage? If gays don't like marriage the way it is (between one man and one woman) they should feck off instead of trying to turn it into something so different that calling it marriage would be a joke, rather than simply leave it for something more aligned to their values.

Why the feck should the decent Catholics have to leave the Church rather than try to reform it into being the thing it is supposed to be? (as opposed to the awful thing it has become over time).

But I guess maybe for some people, 'Catholic' is as much a slur as 'gay' is for others?

The RCC has been an awful for a very long time - but once it got 'official' recognition in the 4th century it gained the secular power to violently imposed an orthodoxy.
One could argue that the 4th C was when the rot really set in because it became an arm of the Roman State and the lines between religious and civil became inextricably intertwined but, in truth, the fight between those who claim an indisputable orthodoxy and those who dissent was there from the beginning.

Luther when he posted his Noble Speech 95 Theses had no intention of breaking away. He wanted to start a dialogue about reform. Rome dismissed him as a drunken monk. When he refused to shut up and he got the equivalent of a million youtube hits (copies were in France within 48 hours) Rome tried the debate tactic and Luther wiped the floor with his opponent. They then tried the 'legal' option - a Papal Bull ordering him to be silent.

Sound familiar?

If one is claiming doctrinal infallibility can one 'reform' if those 'reforms' are in direct contravention of this infallible doctrine?

The issue is there is a huge discrepancy between RCC doctrine and the actual beliefs of many who say they are Roman Catholics - should the Vatican change or should those people admit that the RCC is not the church for them?

AerynSun · 10-02-2014 01:09PM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

should the Vatican change or should those people admit that the RCC is not the church for them?

The Vatican should change. End of. IMO.

I'm far too idealistic to ever settle for "Sure they've been so corrupt for so long, leave them be that way" as an answer for anything.

Because sure the world has been racist for most of its existence. It has also been sexist and homophobic... and aren't we all about trying to change the world for the better?

Zillah · 10-02-2014 01:10PM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

3. Nothing to see here. Move along now.
If I was a betting person....

No kidding; the current solution seems to be that disagreeing with everything the Catholic Church teaches doesn't mean you're not a Catholic, it just means you are a bad Catholic. We all have our challenges.

swampgas · 10-02-2014 01:18PM

AerynSun wrote: »

The Vatican should change. End of. IMO.

I'm far too idealistic to ever settle for "Sure they've been so corrupt for so long, leave them be that way" as an answer for anything.

Because sure the world has been racist for most of its existence. It has also been sexist and homophobic... and aren't we all about trying to change the world for the better?

And if the Vatican refuses to change, what then?

I can't see how the RCC can be separated from the Vatican, can you?

Bannasidhe · 10-02-2014 01:22PM

AerynSun wrote: »

The Vatican should change. End of. IMO.

I'm far too idealistic to ever settle for "Sure they've been so corrupt for so long, leave them be that way" as an answer for anything.

Because sure the world has been racist for most of its existence. It has also been sexist and homophobic... and aren't we all about trying to change the world for the better?

Erasmus felt that way. Did the RCC change?

Did they 'uck.

They entrenched.

If you look at it from the point of view of RCC doctrine - why should they change?

They are the ones who are staying on-message.

They are also very clear about the structure of their religion. It is absolutest and makes no pretence of being otherwise. It says the Pope cannot be wrong when it come to doctrine. End of Story.

The see themselves as the true heirs of Jesus via Peter. The Pope is the spokesman for an eternal and omnipotent God and they believe God's message is clear and they are following that message. How can they possibly now say -'opps. soz. we were wrong for the last 2000 years or so' and still be the Roman Catholic Church?

If one really believes the RCC is the one true religion then for them to do an about face to satisfy a more liberal populace would be for them to betray everything.

They would be Lutherans or Anglicans or whatever - but not Roman Catholics.

AerynSun · 10-02-2014 01:24PM

swampgas wrote: »

And if the Vatican refuses to change, what then?

I can't see how the RCC can be separated from the Vatican, can you?

If the Vatican refuses to change, then they need to be overthrown by whatever means are available. Revolution!! (For the sake of the CIA and any other law enforcement agencies reading this thread: I in no way support or condone violence, of the violent overthrow of oppressive regimes, and I would never ever ever sneak into St Peter's with a backpack full of anything more dangerous than a can of Coca-Cola).

If we can't understand that there is a distinct difference between the power politics that goes on in the Vatican (and at national conference levels across the world), and the average church-going prayerful person who honestly does do their best to live the values of loving their neighbour... then I dunno.

Zubeneschamali · 10-02-2014 01:40PM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

If you look at it from the point of view of RCC doctrine - why should they change?

They are the ones who are staying on-message.

It's interesting that this survey which highlights the differences between official doctrine and people's actual beliefs was ordered by the new Pope.

Part of the tension between Francis and the established Vatican insiders?

Doctor DooM · 10-02-2014 01:41PM

AerynSun wrote: »

It's supposed to be a collection of people who look out for their neighbour, who are loving and kind and respectful of all people, because the image of G-d is in all people.

That's the bottom line. And it sure has strayed from it. Mostly because the people who 'get to decide' (the hierarchy... instead of everybody!) have been on a long, extended power trip that they still haven't given up yet.

The people in the pews should get to decide what the RCC is supposed to be, that's what 'participation'/communion is theoretically all about.

I don't mean to be smart, but is that not what you'd LIKE the Catholic Church to be about?

"Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you, and behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age"

Matthew 28

"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword."

Matthew 10:34

Of course, I'm sure I'll be deluged with people saying every Jesus quote that doesn't agree with how they see it, but that's kinda the point. Everyone thinks it's what they want it to be except for those outside of it...

Iona vs Panti

Comments